1 The players are only taking part in one part of the campaigns history and the technological advancement is going on "behind the scenes."
2 These technological innovations have been discovered but have not seen mass production or are in secluded areas of the world etc.
3 Technological innovations "can" be created but magic/psionics (or some other mystical force) is used instead for various reasons.
4 The campaign world does not "work that way." For example: In Campaign Setting X when Saltpeter, Sulfur and Charcoal are combined they don't make blackpowder because these materials don't behave in such a way.
Now I will explain my reasoning (answers correspond to their numbers above.)
1 This theory falls apart when the PCs themselves try to make discoveries. After all, shouldn't the Wizard with the 20 Intelligence and umpteen ranks in Knowledge Nature be able to figure out that lightning is really just an electric current? Also many campaign settings (not all) have histories of hundreds of years where the level of technology barely changes. This seems strange.
2 This theory is a bit stronger than the first one. However, this falls apart as well in most campaigns. Given the fact that many of the people that would be making these discoveries are fairly high level and have access to numerous forms of magic/psionics it would be relatively easy for them to send news of their discoveries at least to their colleagues. The mass production theory falls apart also because of magic. When the insane Necromancer with his umpteen ranks in Knowledge skills figures out how to make blackpowder is he going to sit around himself making tinny tiny amounts over a long period of time? No, he is going to get his undead minions together, set up a mining operation for the components and get them to work making blackpowder. Then when his minions invade the neighboring kingdom (or in the alternate scenario, when he is attacked and neutralized by the heroes) the blackpowder falls into the kingdom's hands.
3 This theory doesn't stand up to close scrutiny either. In most D&D campaigns commoners use carts to haul things around. Why? Because carts are cheap and easy to produce. Sure, a Tenser's Floating Disk would work just as well or better but that requires a trained spellcaster who must be paid. Now, technology differs from magic in that anyone can use it. With technology if materials X and Y are combined Z is always the result regardless of whether a scholar or a peasant mixes them together. Magic is very different. So, with this variant technology would still be developed by those who could not or did not want to use magic.
4 Beyond stripping away some of the "reality" from a campaign this theory runs into the flaw of PCs eventually asking "Okay, well what do the ingredients for Blackpowder do when I mix them together?" The simple fact is that something mixed together is going to make some kind of explosive similar to blackpowder. If not the plausibility of the campaign tends to crumble eventually.
Now, the one answer that most people have probably thought of by now is that "Yes people have thought of these things and are developing them as the PCs adventure." This is probably the best way to handle the subject however, the problem of PCs discovering scientific phenomena and capitalizing on them once again presents itself. There are certain things that DMs can do to curb these such as imposing limits on what Knowledge skills and Divination magic will tell a PC about the world around him but this also falls apart. If there are caps on what Knowledge skills will tell someone how does the civilization progress? How did it progress to its current level?
These are interesting questions we confront when we try to balance plausibility with fantasy. This is one of the ultimate struggles a DM must make.
You've got a couple of fallacies working there. The first is that technology CAN develop. This is a magical universe that completely defies the laws of physics and science as we understand it. In such a universe there is no reason to expect the physical laws of this one will apply in the same way. We have multi ton creatures flying... and out flying even hawks by several times over speed wise. Why should gun powder and other forms of normal physical relationships of other kinds be automatically assumed to work?
The plausibility of the campaign in NO MANNER suffers any more from gun powder not working as it does from multi ton creatures that are able to fly and "breathe fire/lightning/acid/freezing cold/chlorine gas" or whatever else. It suffers not one whit less from this than it does from a man being able to stand against a dozen armed, competent warriors with nothing more than a sword and armor and have ANY chance of survival whatsoever.
This is a game of fantasy. Science fact and physics have NO place in it more than the DM will allow.
Now, if the DM wants to outlaw all magic, psionics and other such mummery and then allow all of the normal laws of physics to function, then he not only no longer has a D&D game, or a fantasy game, he has a game engine that makes an EXTREMELY lousy recreation of real life.
Isshia
So, how about quickening research with divinations? Well, all divinations that can be used for this purpose rely on information from another entity (giving you biased information)(most often a deity) and/or give only a small piece of information. So when using Contact Other Plane for the question 'how do I most easily create something that explodes?' the answer would be 'you're a wizard, cast a fireball'. Even then, as a Wizard, you'd probably be more interested in advancing your own arcane studies, than starting again from scratch with something new.
There are 'caps' to knowledge skills. When taking a rank in a knowledge skill, knowledge just don't pop up in your head. It represents what you have read and learnt during your adventures (or staying at home browsing through the local library). To know what lightning is through a knowledge skill someone else must have already found out (and the information as been passed on, either by word or by letter), that which haven't been found out can't be learned by a simple knowledge check.
Furthermore, lightning (and most other natural phenomena, such as rainbows) would probably not pass under knowledge (nature), or any ordinary knowledge skill for that matter, but more likely knowledge (physics). 'Why?' you say (ok, maybe not, but lets pretend for the sake of argument), 'knowledge (physics) does not exist in the PHB'. Of course not, out there in your average D&D world there is most probably not a single person having dedicated its life to researching physics, and its not that important to your average adventurer.
So, to all DMs out there: If a player pesters you about making technological advancements, say 'yes, you may begin developing [whatever they want to], but then you won't have time to continue your career as an adventurer'.
The technology for the e.g. is the in existence maybe even cheaper/easier to handle than the magic variant but!
It is a Secret!
Say you figure it out. Well, why tell anyone? Think of how useful a secret can be to an order. Particularly if those orders are anti-magic in any way. Fantasy is filled with "ancient secrets" and "lost arts". Take for example the Sword of Shannara (hey! its another Shea!) and think of the way the Druids had blackpowder as well as magic, but nobody else has it. Actually it did creep in here and there, but as a dangerous substance (and one that requires an arcane amount of training and intelligence to properly and safely manipulate) the knowledge of its secrets was not just given to everyone.
Any evil orders that develop such science could be expected to viciously protect their "secret arts" to the point of (particularly in a fantasy setting) casting wonky spells that prevent the very natural function from working except under precise circumstances.
- Blackpowder functions normally,
- Some evil order figures out the secret,
- They wield it with great power,
- Some good orders figure it out as well,
- The evil order jealously contacts a demon prince and has an epic spell cast that prevents anyone save for those marked with the sign of demon lord XXX from being able to successfully create black powder. If they try, mephits appear to disturb the process. It can still be done, but you need to be inside a magic circle to actually create it; and imps are paid in liquid pain to "fetch" any blackpowder found in anyone other than the evil order's possession.
- No one but the evil order can create blackpowder without summoning demons accidentally
- Blackpowder becomes associated with evil
- The original evil order is destroyed in a fiery conflagration
- Demons continue to plague blackpowder creators
- The art is lost due to frustration and plague
- The end
You could also take a look at the way Robert Jordan includes blackpowder in the Wheel of Time: Illuminators Guild?
Note: That there list there (ya hear) was inspired by the anti-magic spell that was cast in the Heralds of Valdemar series by that pretty raven haired writer lady - Mercedes Lackey.
As always, I could go on, but I'll wait. ;) Interesting topic, I like the idea, seems slightly forked (multiple prongs
not comin together), and it could be longer.1) Yes we have all heard the "There's magic and dragons etc. and you want realistic [insert item here]." But if you think about this for awhile, most D&D worlds have physics like those in the real world, for instance, objects still create gravity effects (otherwise everyone could fly or at least "float"), the principles that govern projectiles still apply and oxidation reactions work normally. This is all gun powder would need to work in a D&D world. On another note, the physical and scientific principles in the real world must on some level overlap with those in the fantasy world otherwise players would have a very difficult time relating to it.
2) As far as advancement is concerned there is really no argument as to whether it "can" happen. Otherwise there is no explanation as to how the world got to its current technology level. If anything saying technology is static ruins the plausibility of the campaign. Secondly if gun powder not working in a D&D world in no way affects its plausibility then it also shouldn't be affected if it does work.
In regard to the second response:
1) Knowledge skills do represent to a point what a character has read and learned from teachers, but they also represent how well a character can connect together information he has already learned.
2) Most kingdoms in the "average" D&D world will have a way to reverse engineer something. One wizard with the spell "Analyze Object" (or the spell that does that, don't have my PHB with me at the moment) will usually do the trick. Also you are absolutely right about what most people do when faced with a new invention, they want to profit. Thats why light bulbs burn out so fast and we drill miles underground for diamonds. Now how does one profit off a discovery or invention? Sell products to people for a price.
3) As far as divinations are concerned they reveal as much and as reliable a information as the DM allows so again all of this depends on the individual DM so I consider this to be a very subjective topic.
On a side note:
in your average D&D world there is most probably not a single person having dedicated its life to researching physics, and its not that important to your average adventurer.
Any member of a martial character class, most spellcasters, rogues, siege engineers, apothecaries, alchemists, blacksmiths and coachbuilders have all dedicated their lives to researching physics. They just don't have the Knowledge (physics) skill. They research physics how it applies to their trade and the reason why it's not a skill in the PHB is that it would provide a synergy bonus on almost every physical skill in the game.
Beyond stripping away some of the "reality" from a campaign this theory runs into the flaw of PCs eventually asking "Okay, well what do the ingredients for Blackpowder do when I mix them together?" The simple fact is that something mixed together is going to make some kind of explosive similar to blackpowder. If not the plausibility of the campaign tends to crumble eventually.
Elaborate. Mostly, on the matter of campaign plausibly crumbling. I see absolutely no indications of such. Of course, explosives can be made under the [enter specific period of time, such as the heart of winter] with alchemy, by fusing the blood of a fire dragon and essence from fire elementals. The elemental essence being what empowers the explosion, the dragon breath shaping it by the law of similarity.
On a side note: I do realize that some players don't have as much trouble relating to a world without many elements of real world physics or chemistry but this article was not written for DMs with those types of players.
Also, as far as epic spells being cast to change physical properties of the world, I'm pretty sure none exist that can do that. That is the realm of salient divine abilities. After all we are talking about fundamentally altering part of the fabric of creation, that's not something that should be a spell regardless of the level. Yes I know that all spells alter creation in some way or another but this would change the way things work, that means that if someone decided they didn't like gravity and acquired enough experience they could eliminate it. That is a big big change and IMO shouldn't be available to PCs regardless of level.
As far as the article being forked that is mostly intentional and partly from sloth
. I wanted people to just take a look at some of the theories I had, add some of their own and then draw their own conclusions.Thanks for posting.
To address the first response:
1) Yes we have all heard the "There's magic and dragons etc. and you want realistic [insert item here]." But if you think about this for awhile, most D&D worlds have physics like those in the real world, for instance, objects still create gravity effects (otherwise everyone could fly or at least "float"), the principles that govern projectiles still apply and oxidation reactions work normally. This is all gun powder would need to work in a D&D world. On another note, the physical and scientific principles in the real world must on some level overlap with those in the fantasy world otherwise players would have a very difficult time relating to it.
Not necessarily. Many of them will, some ABOLUTELY do NOT and can not. Dragons, could NEVER fly in a reasonable universe. There is no more room for them in a reasonable universe than there is for a lack of gravity constraints.
So why?
Basically, because these are ALSO the rules of this "alternate universe". After nearly thirty years of doing this, the players, and most of mine have, like I do, one or more degrees in various fields, including my wife with her twin masters degrees in Physics and Mathematics, do not find this at all a stretch.
What IS a stretch, and more than a small one, is expecting that all of the rules of physics and chemical interaction from our universe MUST be the same in a game universe that allows for magic and dragons.
From a reasonable POV, the two are MUTUALY EXCLUSIVE. Trying to foist some of the rules of chemical interaction into the D&D game universe because SOME of the laws of physics work is counter productive and leads to the type of fallacy you've found difficult to credit. It would be.
2) As far as advancement is concerned there is really no argument as to whether it "can" happen. Otherwise there is no explanation as to how the world got to its current technology level. If anything saying technology is static ruins the plausibility of the campaign. Secondly if gun powder not working in a D&D world in no way affects its plausibility then it also shouldn't be affected if it does work.
Again, inaccurate. For the reasons stated above and one more; the gods. Or, if you don't want gods, the very metaphyisc of magic itself, which allows for such blatant impossibilities and out right silliness as flying dragons and 99 out of every 100 of the standard magical effects.
snip
Mine in blue.
Isshia
Well it is certainly true that if a DM rules that gunpowder's ingredients simply "don't work" in his campaign the plausibility won't suffer too much, my point was that if DMs consistently use this method to keep various technological elements out of their campaign eventually players will wonder why certain principles of physics and chemistry do work (inertia for instance) while others seem to selectively work (oxidation for another example). Its not that I'm trying to make D&D a completely true to life physical model of the real world (which is impossible seeing as how our knowledge of the real world is quite limited), rather I'm trying to make it easier for the players to relate to a fantasy world by including normal things one would expect to happen/work in the real world.
In my world, the chemistry doesn't work. At all. Things have completely different reasons for working. For (player) convenience, things such as gravity and burning, and other obvious things do work, but with different reasons, still. Besides, modern physics can't explain the "why" of gravity.
The trick is to have stuff from the real world but 'mask' it in your world. In my world I have doctors, firefighters and even machinery but I make it fit into the fantasy. The best example of this is Arcanum. In the game there is magick and technology, and they are 'at war' similar to religion and science in our own world. For your campaign you can integrate it by linking magic to technology (like I do) or making them at war (like Arcanum) or just ignore them, as long as you explain it to the players then they shouldn't have a problem.
Electricity can come from magic, lightning or power stations for example. What I'm saying is when the players start asking questions like 'how do you make blackpowder' what you say in response depends on the campaign. It could be realistic, alchemy or just magic is so wide-spread it *is* technology.
Interesting article anyway and it is a big question you have to ask when making a campaign. I prefer no true technology although some rudimentary things made by Gnomes just gives them some more flavour (like very simple steam engines and electric motors for example).
2) Well I suppose that depending on how strong the gods are in an individual campaign a DM could rule they have imposed limits on that sort of thing although I have yet to see any campaign setting where this is the case. Yes I'm sure there is probably one out there that is like this but my point is that in the worlds of Oerth, Eberron, Faerun and Krynn to name a few the gods have not imposed any such limits and these are some of the iconic D&D worlds. The same is true of the magic theory.
Dragons, could NEVER fly in a reasonable universe.
Perhaps dragons have developed a theoretically acceptable way to control inertia. But do we live in a reasonable universe anyway? Does a universe where all things obey an iron rule of cause and effect exist? This can never be proven. Natural Causality, Objectivity and Time and Space constancy are all matters of personal faith. I personally like to think that what we call "laws of physics" are more like habits. While laws are exclusively man made things all living creatures have habits.
This really is a subjective argument because as the original poster has made clear, its a personal decision whether or not to facilitate verisimilitude while simultaneously allowing for the additional presence of dragons and so forth. It is conceivable that what looks like magic or dragons is just really advanced technology which follows a perfectly reliable and adequately explainable mechanism. If you're Arthur C. Clark you probably won't object to that much.
One fallacy has been made clear, the assumption that we should all feel equally inclined to compromise our love of fantasy or "that which currently is not perceived as reality" for the comfort of that which appears to be reality before our eyes. While it is not necessarily true that without maximum verisimilitude states of affairs cannot be otherwise explained it is also not implied that the explanations of this world must be altogether abandoned.
Now given that the D&D world we consider employs this one as a basic template then my solution to the whole issue would be to allow technological development but to regulate it by forcing PCs to engage in physical investigation even if its only represented by buying a few ranks in some new skill. The ranks required for laying out the principles needed to achieve something like the computer revolution in medieval times would be ridiculously high (unless it involves magic), but I'm also not one of those DMs who feels comfortable playing in an unnaturally static setting. However, it is absolutely imperative that developing technology or the ability to do so as well as the result when combined with magic becomes no more advantageous than any other occupation or ability.
1. In a world with magic and divine, we're not dealing with as much physics. Sure there's gravity, buoyancy, winds, and the like, but there's also a lot more divine spark. In most worlds, these things exist purely by the will of the gods. As a result, there's more metaphysics which replaces our physics. Metaphysics isn't the purview of mortals, and especially not our science.
Note: If you follow this to conclusion, its perfectly logical that magic is in fact scientific progress. Clerics work that divine spark, wizards produce the effects of the cosmos, much like we do with machines. In a way, the understanding of science and magic is the same.
2. Progress isn't immediate. The reason that middle age people didn't develop high quality ballistics was for several reasons. First off, they didn't have the knowledge that underlies it. Science builds on itself. Secondly, they didn't have the tools to obtain those knowledges. And thirdly, they didn't have the tools to produce results. That being said, the players should be allowed to spur technology with their knowledges. Make sure to invent relevant custom knowledges, like 'chemistry'. However, keep in mind that technology advance is slow. It years to work out new theories, so players should spend years.
Note: That being said, call Einstein an epic-level expert with all the right knowledges.
It's however your take on meta-science works.
I personally think there should be some parallels between the real world and the fantasy world these characters live in. However, that being said regardless of how the world works there should be ways for the PCs to perceive this. For instance, say the Deities or whoever is responsible for the campaign setting made lightning work normally as it does in the real world but it’s instead powered by elementals that dwell in the sky. Now obviously that is very different from how it works in the real world, but what is to keep PCs from figuring this out and then harnessing that energy. Perhaps a PC decides to try the old lightning rod trick to see if it works to harness the energy of lightning. Of course the DM is free to rule on whether it does or does not work all I'm saying is that however the universe in the campaign works it should be consistent and the PCs should be able to perceive how natural phenomena work.
As far as the universe being reasonable it really depends on your definition of reason. As I said earlier we aren't sure about what is in the vast majority of our universe but we do know that a few things are fairly consistent. That is why I said that the laws of physics and such in a fantasy world if not realistic should at least be consistent.
Stuff:
1) Some people play D&D (and other such games) for the idea that there is another reality, that can be explained like ours, but has cooler rules.
- these people usually don't want to add technojunk
- but if the do, it is almost always part of the campaign setting (d20 modern)
2) Where did the technojunk come from? or the original idea, at least?
- a PC (this requires lots of downtime); WHERE DID THE CHARACTER GET THE IDEA? THIS DOESN'T COUNT UNLESS THE PLAYER CAN ACTUALLY PROVIDE AN ACCEPTABLE REASON FOR THE CHARACTER!!! see below for acceptable ideas
- genius (a mad scientist/eccentric inventor type); if making weapons, then he/she is probably either out for personal gain or a naive person working for a well funded organization/nation- it stays a secret
- organization (that has been, probably secretly, trying to develop technojunk for years if not centuries); unless (and maybe even if) these people are working publicly for a nation or city state, they are probably either working for personal gain or for other selective motives (mage killers, support the empire, airship builders)- it probably stays a secret
- outside influence (alternate material planes, space invaders, the isle of Lantan, archeological digs, etc- anywhere that is isolated or isolationist); these influences are either short lived (if it leaves or is destroyed), or are limited (sure, you can learn to make any early technojunk you want, but you have to go study here and/or take levels in this prestige class)- even if it isn't secret, mass production it isn't (not for a long time if ever)
3) Logically consider the world; in a world dominated by magic users will anyone really spend years of study attempting to learn a new way of doing things (craft blackpowder for instance), especially if they can spend an equal or shorter amount of time and learn to be a spellcaster?
- if only one type of power is known (magic), then the actual chances of another force being developed is very low (discounting plot hooks, and PC's of course- with them anything goes)
- if the only people likely to have the learning to develop technojunk are already on another path it is very unlikely that they'll just start something totally new (it's like multiclassing, only worse)
- if the gods (as a general rule, this means a consensus of the major deities, not all powers great and small) created the world with a specific system in mind, and some mortals started messing with technojunk, how would they feel? this is assuming that they even allow such travesties to persist (remember they can take a direct hand).
- finally, if a few learned individuals do actually develop some technojunk, how many commoners will look on it any differently than magic? blackpowder and lighting bolts both kill with a flash and a bang. unless you're dealing with a smarter population base (organized schools, say grade 6 level), then most commoners won't trust technojunk.
4) Notes
- epic spells can do anything, you just have to be able to match the casting DC
- though it would be relatively easy for mages to develop magic that reverse engineers technology, who says that it exists? only mage-crafters (that didn't focus on magic items) would care for these spells. yup, all 3 of them.
- claiming that our universe is easily explainable is like claiming that pi is a simple calculation. it all depends on how far you go (22/7, or 3.14285...).
- scientific progress is actually quite slow at lower levels; bronze age to iron age is some 1,000 to 5,000 years *cough, I suck at history, cough*, the renaissance took about 200 years, and now computers are obsolete after 10 months (if that).
My campaign?
- air is air. there is no mix, you just breath it (no thin air, no greater o2 quantities in lower altitudes, nothing- either there's an atmosphere or not). this has no effect on airborn disease or poison, or cloud effect- they are normal air with something (particulate matter) added.
- gravity is magic. planets, large objects (at least a mile across), and enchanted gear have gravity. nothing else does.
- light is light. there is no x-rays, infa red, or what have you. there is light, shadow, darkness, that's it. this means no radiation sickness.
- I use the billiards ball model of the atom. this means there is no such thing as nuclear fusion or fission. this means no major creation to create a solid 10 lb sphere of uranium as a final attack.
- electricty doesn't flow down wires. why should it? it's too busy blowing stuff up. note, electricity type technojunk is replaced with vrillic technology (link: new magical items; vril powered items )
- and I use guns. blastpowder (rather than blackpowder), is crafted through alchemy. simple weapons that deal similar damage to crossbows, with crummier ranges but better criticals. Loud as pandemonium.
Man, I need sleep. blame any spelling errors on my being tired. Same goes with stupid comments. g'night!
Unfortunately, this is just that the real world and is based upon a set of rules, the laws of physics, that precludes such mystic power. D&D on the other hand is fictional and based upon an arbitrary set of rules, a set of rules that implicitly states that gunpowder does not function. And indeed this is how I run my games. I want to play fantasy and for me that means no science beyond the very basics. Arbitrary, yes, but I feel no compulsion to justify plausibility in a system of rules designed by a group of gamers huddled around a table somewhere in the bowels of Wizards of the Coast offices. Nor do I feel any need to defend the inherent implausibility of a dragon's flight and nutritional needs, the walking undead or a wizard's ability to create fire in full rebellion against the laws of thermodynamics.
I can't argue that to simply deny the possibility of gunpowder is arbitrary but within the context of a incredibly arbitrary set of rules this doesn't bother me.
I'd also completely agree with one of the previous posters that technology and science exist only as far as the setting's rules for what makes up THAT reality allow them to. So the game world is all you wish it to be. Reference the world creation concepts in the back of the 1e manual of the planes for more ideas.
One thing I noticed: The Renaissance lasted 200 years, yes, but I don't think it’s quite fair to compare that to individual computers. I think its better when the Renaissance is compared to, The Information Age or Age of Reason etc. These are more along the proper time lines.
In Oerth, blackpowder doesn't work. If your gnome from Faerun rolls in with his heater and a handful of grenades, they are rendered inert until he leaves the Realmspace.
The Spelljammer setting, which woefully does not yet have a WoTC sourcebook, exists on the principle that objects in space generate a flat plane of gravity equal to the gravitational pull of an earth-sized planet which is sufficient to retain pockets of breathable atmosphere.
I'm a dungeon master and a college student, and so I prefer to use real physics and chemistry with my well educated players whenever possible, but I think that there is a way to modernize without resorting to the boring progress made by our boring ancestors.
Consider: When primitive humans found fire, they were not creating something new, but rather finding a way to harness something already present in nature. When Franklin discovered electricity, he was not creating something new, but rather making observations based upon something already existent in nature. They were aware of a problem and sought a solution within the bounds of their environment. Cave men (and women) wanted a source of heat and light, so they borrowed fire. Franklin and Edison wanted a cheap, easily accessible source of energy. They borrowed electricity.
Even if your dungeon master allows fire (I hope so), electricity, and gunpowder to exist in the fantasy world of Dungeons & Dragons, I would make the argument that no one would bother researching and using them, or at least the latter pair. The solution to the problem of cheap, clean energy and easy ways to blow up your neighbor already exist in nature. The Franklins and Edisons of the Dungeons & Dragons universe would borrow magic.
Within the bounds of the core rulebooks, magic is something so rare and exotic that average commoners probably see magic once or twice a lifetime. In alternate settings, however, advances could be made making arcane energy cheaply available to the masses.
Imagine it. Airships with levitation and propulsion mechanisms powered by an arcane energy reservoir, pistols and rifles loaded with spell ammunition firing disruptive arcane projectiles into their enemies, steered and wielded by experts and soldiers without any expensive mage training whatsoever. Allowing the development of such arcane technology is a big step to take for any dungeon master, and one has to consider the world-changing ramifications of such technology, but I would take it over smoky, crude, dangerous firearms any day.
In conclusion, you can have guns and airships without ruining your game with gunpowder. It's even logical--the scientists, inventors, and physicists of a fantasy world would sooner expand and develop an existing power source than risk a venture in to a grossly inferior one. Heck, look at Eberron, they've done it to a certain extent already.
I'm a dungeon master and a college student, and so I prefer to use real physics and chemistry with my well educated players whenever possible, but I think that there is a way to modernize without resorting to the boring progress made by our boring ancestors.
Strange. I do not use traditional or modern physics or chemistry, though I do know enough about them. Part of the reason for GMing, for me, is simply researching strange worlds.